User talk:Dustfreeworld

October 2024

Hello, I'm Jannatulbaqi. I have removed your contribution (awards section) on the ANI article. I don't think it is needed there. Because it was given to ANI founder Prem Prakash and not to ANI. Thanks Jannatulbaqi (talk) 18:49, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

I don’t think I’ve removed any content from that article. No. Would you please provide the diff?

OTOH, you have removed the content I added just now [1]. The person was an employee (and founder) of ANI and he got an award for his contribution to journalism. I don’t think that content should be removed. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 19:04, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Did the person win the award, or the organization? - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:06, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

[Edit conflict] The person. But it’s the right place for that content. Please see Agence France-Presse#Prizes and awards --Dustfreeworld (talk) 19:09, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

@Adolphus79, re your recent edit, I think it obviously doesn’t align with WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM, and probably has an issue with WP:NOBLANK as well. WRT the concern you expressed in your edit summary, we are not talking about Article for creation or Article for deletion ... As long as the person was mentioned in news/ media (I.E.. reliable source), then the person is not a journalist of nobody and can be included. That edit of yours is removing cited text.

Aside, it's ... interesting that you aren't restoring the other edit of mine, which is also cited and relevant to to article, but choosed to remove more content instead. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 21:17, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

In case you think the source isn’t good enough, why not help FIXIngTHEPROBLEM by finding a better source? E.g., https://freepresskashmir.news/2017/09/23/journalismisnotacrime-list-of-journalists-killed-in-kashmir-proves-otherwise/amp/ from Free Press Kashmir? --Dustfreeworld (talk) 21:30, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Wrong again, for a person to be notable, they need to have more than just their name mentioned once in an article about someone else. Please read WP:NBASIC. If we allowed anyone who has had their name mentioned in the news, then almost anyone would be "notable", myself included. On top of that, you are wrong about the person in question being a journalist, as the article you cited claimed they were only a photographer. Also, it is not my responsibility to find a better source, the WP:ONUS is on the person adding the content. - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:53, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

You are citing WP:NBASIC, which is a section of WP:Notability (people), but have you read the very first part of it?

On Wikipedia, notability is a test used by editors to decide whether a given topic warrants its own article.

It’s the first time I heard that whenever we mention a name in our article we need to check the notability guideline, which is a very innovative interpretation of the guideline I would say.

As to whether the person was a journalist, you may want to read this. OTOH, even *if* we really don’t think he’s a journalist, the issue can easily be fixed by changing the section heading from == Notable journalists == into == Notable employees ==, in accordance with WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM.

P.S. As the content *is* appropriate for inclusion, I don’t think ONUS applies here. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 00:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Feel free to explain why you think he is notable enough, other than "he died and was mentioned in an article about someone else". - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:06, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

I am also starting to grow weary of your WP:WIKILAWYERING, especially when you keep throwing WP shortcuts at me that you obviously have not fully read (I.E. WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM, not being related at all to non-notable additions, WP:NOBLANK for reverting a non-notable addition, and your attempts the last time we spoke (which you have conveniently removed from this talk page)), I feel it is starting to verge on WP:DISRUPTIVE. - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:18, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Please see my reply above. Aside, my attempts the last time we spoke to suggest that we focus in commenting article content, instead of commenting on editors, seems failed; and I’m now being thrown some “personalised” new WP shortcuts.

Anyway, that article does seem controversial and people seem to have strong feelings about it. I guess it may not be worth for me to spend much time on it anymore. Let’s accept that we are happy with a subpar/problematic article for our readers. --Dustfreeworld (talk) 01:08, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

No, let's be clear, 2 days ago you accused me of editing in bad faith, stalking you (across a total of 2 pages that were on my watchlist long before you ever started editing), claimed statements I made regarding policy were untrue, threw completely unrelated WP shortcuts at me in an attempt to scare me, mentioned "articles that [you] 'owned'", and even admitted that you were lazy and WP:TIRED. All because I questioned your adding multiple empty section headings to an article and your incorrect maintenance templates. My comments about your tban (of which, indoor air pollution could be construed as a health/medical topic) were not a personal attack, those (tbans AND personal attacks) are taken very seriously around here. If you think the article is "subpar", work to improve the content already there, please do not add additional "subpar" content and throw more unrelated WP shortcuts at me that you haven't bothered to read.

And if you are going to add a person as a "notable" anything, then the ONUS is on you to show they pass notability concerns, not to tell me to find more sources to prove that the person passes. Otherwise, why don't we just add every photographer/journalist that ever worked for the organization and happened to be mentioned in some random article? Why don't we add every citizen that has ever been merely mentioned in a newspaper article to their community's article's list of "notable residents"? - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:09, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Well, you aren’t admitting that your interpretation of WP:BASIC is inappropriate. It seems to me that you are preventing other editors to improve our article through addition of content. Perhaps you would like to edit the AFP page and trim most of it’s content according to your criteria? (Aside, that person died from a parcel bomb when he’s an employee of ANI, how many employees of a news agency died like that?) Re our last conversation, I don’t think it’s related to this discussion (unless people are taking things personal). That said, I don’t remember that I’ve ever mentioned the phrase “personal attacks”; but if you think it’s the appropriate description, perhaps it really is. Again, I hope we aren’t taking things personal, and people can comment on article content instead of editors. Thanks and regards, --Dustfreeworld (talk) 02:44, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

As for the concern you expressed in your edit summary, please see

• Agence France-Presse#Prizes and awards

--Dustfreeworld (talk) 19:07, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

@Jannatulbaqi, please kindly note that according to our talk page guidelines, if you edit your post after it’s being posted and after someone has already replied to it, it is best to indicate any changes you’ve made (with underline or striking out for example) and sign your post again with the latest time stamp.

As for your concern that “I don't think it is needed there. Because it was given to ANI founder Prem Prakash and not to ANI.”, as I’ve said above, the AFP page also have a similar section, in which the awards were given to people but not the organisation. I would appreciate if you can self-revert. Thanks and regards, --Dustfreeworld (talk) 20:11, 19 October 2024 (UTC)